It cost a lot of companies a lot of money, time, and sales while they resubmitted the same applications to the Commerce Department.
well now Mr. BAKER, it has cost a lot of companies a lot of TIME and MONEY and SALES to adhere to laws that were obviously UNCONSTITUTIONAL from the very beginning, such that even the most dimwitted of citizens could tell you, but the sharpest politicians and bureacrats in our government could or would not, all erected by a government way out of control and subject to covert machinations by a massively funded/favored constituency known as the SPOOKS, under the patriotic guise of NATIONAL SECURITY. *spit* I sincerely hope that this is the first straw that breaks that fraudulent camel's back. soon let the whole corrupt structure fall like the rotten house of cards that it is. ironic indeed that you of all people would lament the "money, time, and sales" that have cost companies in the bureacratic and regulatory quagmire that is known as our government. yes, let your hastily-composed email stand as eternal testament to the fact that SOME PEOPLE JUST DON'T GET IT, even as they wallow daily in their own hypocrisy. the horrid and repulsive episode known as "cryptography regulations" is indicative that there are some people in the world who are not playing by rules of honor and integrity, even as they live under the same country, they do not have an agenda that is befitting of the welfare of the general populace, that they will exercise the greatest ingenuity in stretching their own authorities beyond that which is legitimate, in the attempt to glom as much power as can be obtained, and can be restrained from their covert machinations against their fellow man only by the shrewdest of vigilance-- something we have been deeply remiss and negligent, as a nation, in invoking. when in the course of human events it become necessary to expunge a parasite... gosh, could it really be the authority was handed to the commerce department so "the government could avoid the constitutional deficiencies of its regulations by rotating oversight of them from department to department"??? naw. ah, but that would be like impugning the impeccable motives of the tooth fair, would it not? (if so, it would be the one of the least vile and sleazy tactics employed so far in the whole sorry affair.) I am sorry that this message can barely begin to muster the sarcastic contempt I feel for you and your despicable cohorts, Mr. Baker. if you prefer a more civil message, perhaps TCM will have some consolation for you.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 26 Aug 97 11:51:37 EST From: Stewart Baker <sbaker@mail.steptoe.com> To: fight-censorship-announce@vorlon.mit.edu, declan@well.com Subject: Re: FC: John Gilmore to cypherpunks on Bernstein decision
Declan--
John is entitled to brag about the Bernstein decision, but getting the Department of State to "RWA" all of its pending license applications is nothing to brag about. It cost a lot of companies a lot of money, time, and sales while they resubmitted the same applications to the Commerce Department.
I said at the time that State's advice to crypto exporters in those last few weeks was "Get your tongue out of my mouth, I'm kissing you good-bye."
Perhaps the cause of this action was the lawsuit, perhaps it was spite at the crypto exporters who lobbied for a change in jurisdiction, but whatever the cause, it was not a good thing for anybody who is actually in the crypto business.
Stewart